Capquest Statutory demand for cap1 card debt

[UK26]

Thanks for your continued help Nevos

 

no, there was no amounts in previous letter, it was to make them aware that the account contained illegal charges etc.

 

Copy of letter sent

 

 

 

 

 

Latest Letter sent, due to them sending me a letter about issueing a SD

 

Edited August 31, 2008 by UK26
added content

[nevos]

Hi, OK, it is starting to unfold. I wonder if, you don't acknowledge the debt as you have told them, does it make it difficult to claim back the charges? given that the whole charges question relies on your breach of contract for which, you have been penalised.

[UK26]

yes, i did notice this today when looking back at all letters sent and receieved.

 

i can't dispute i took the account out now, since they issued a credit agreement with my signature on it, however, it does not comply and so is not enforceable.

 

I still enclosed don't acknowledge the debt, due to

 

A, I requested a copy of sale of debt or deed of assessment

which they have not provided.

 

so don't acknowledge could still apply? as they have not shown any documents which allows or gives them the right to collect.

 

so until such date as they comply with the full request made in

February 08, i could still claim againsts Captial One i guess

Edited August 31, 2008 by UK26

[UK26]

just been reading

 

Credit Today online

 

it would appear, without a notice of assignment, they are not entitled to collect.

[UK26]

[update]

 

Caqquest has still failed to respond so here is a letter my solicitor is going to send

 

[MARTIN3030]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/158682-capquest-dont-let-them.html

[AliasOmega]

interesting read..

 

keep us informed

[UK26]

maybe, the Team Admins, make this a sticky, this will no doubt help everyone, as this is moving forward quick now,

 

The outcome of this, would help everyone who has issues with CapQuest

[DonkeyB]

subbing

[UK26]

[update]

 

[UK26]

[update]

 

Letter received from CapQuest -- now they deny receiving my letters

 

[UK26]

My Response

 

[Linus]

Some great letters there to Capquest UK 26,I am reading this thread with great interest.

 

If you want to put a face to Lisa Slater of Capquest then pop here and see the 2007 Capquest Xmas Party.....

 

Photo Album

[UK26]

Thanks for the Picture

Edited September 16, 2008 by UK26

[stuscfc]

You could have some realy fun with them pics as a few captions lol and they are realy ppl not what you picture in your head lol.

[mr.ton]

Dont you just love these tit-4-tats with DCA's

[OnMyWayOut]

Yeah, but what sort of people? No-one I would want to be friends with. Perhaps that's why they use networking sites?

[UK26]

I have had a phone call from Ms Slater from CapQuest

 

She has transfered the case to there Solicitors for there response

 

been told, i should get a full reply by end of the week.

 

wonder what there solicitor will say

[UK26]

CapQuest have now updated my credit report, to reflect there new refunds, but its stil incorrect, as the true balance is below £650 not over £1100 which they claim.

 

even then, there credit agreement is unenforceable, so in fact all the amount is incorrect as they there never entitled to repayment.

 

its currently now with both parties solicitors to try and settle out of court.

 

My solicitor is only instructed to put some presure on them to comply to my requests. should they still not reduce the balance to under £650. I then need to decide what action to take.

 

the problem i am stuck with, im not sure if i can sue them for over charging fees etc, as i have not paid them yet, they are only posted on the account, which is outstanding / disputed.

 

Can i take them to court, order they refund all the fees? and when they counterclaim for the £650, then bring in the fact there credit agreement is non-enforceable?

 

I would sit around and wait for them to take action, which they never will, but i want the default removed from my credit report.

[UK26]

[update]

 

Looks like CapQuest are trying to play hard to reason with or really dont know what makes a valid credit agreement.

 

 

Under SI 1983/1553 the prescribed terms must be within the signature

document to be valid, having them on a separate sheet headed T&C or similar is not

acceptable. I Quote; “SI 1983/1553 (6 Signing of agreement) which states that the

prescribed terms must be within the signature document. (Column 2 schedule 6)”

 

In the credit agreement Capquest have supplied, i fail to see any precribed terms within the document.

Think they are worried now, as they are basically asking me not to take them to court, there reasoning for this is, they want to be given the chance to be shown the faults within the agreement supplied.

I think they are trying to pull a fast one here, Can Capquest really not know the difference between an enforceable and an unenforceable credit agreement?

 

Edited September 23, 2008 by UK26

[jo5ephedward5]

subbing! - i'm planning on taking CapQuest on after 3 years of agro - i've sent them a DSAR today to ensure i have all copies of letters sent etc.

 

i'm sure this thread will prove very useful!

 

good luck

[UK26]

My solicitor is now going to give me a draft letter for my approval before sending a reply to CapQuest

CapQuest are trying ever so hard now to dig them self’s out of this mess, but with letters they sent me, I think they will have a hard time.

The last paragraph in CapQuests letter about section 136 of the Law of Property Act. I Need to read up on this and find out if its true what they are saying.

CapQuest have not given me a NOA nor as Capital One Bank

[jo5ephedward5]

i will be starting a thread for suing them including a list of all correspondance between now and 3 late 2005 along which includes them, me, halifax and trading standards - i fully intend to win and to get monies i paid to them years ago along with interest and damages - they have harrased me every day for 3 years - despite reciving a letter quoting the telecomunications act to them to stop calling me [they've had this 3 times via recoreded delivery]

 

so with this in mind i really hope you get somewhere- if enough of us take them on with some luck they will be forced to shut!

[Linus]

Would the proof of assignment be covered by this:

 

196. Regulations respecting notices.- (1) Any notice required or authorised to be served or given by this Act shall be in writing.

 

(2) Any notice required or authorised by this Act to be served on a lessee or mortgagor shall be sufficient, although only addressed to the lessee or mortgagor by that designation, without his name, or generally to the persons interested, without any name, and notwithstanding that any person to be effected by the notice is absent, under disability, unborn, or unascertained.

 

(3) Any notice required or authorised by this Act to be served shall be sufficiently served if it is left at the last-known place of abode or business in the United Kingdom of the lessee, lessor, mortagee, mortgagor, or other person to be served, or, in case of a notice required or authorised to be served on a lessee or mortgagor, is affixed or left for him on the land or any house or building comprised in the lease or mortgage, or, in case of a mining lease, is left for the lessee at the office or counting-house of the mine.

 

(4) Any notice required or authorised by this Act to be served shall also be sufficiently served, if it is sent by post in a registered letter addressed to the lessee, lessor, mortgagee, mortgagor, or other person to be served, by name, at the aforesaid place of abode or business office, or counting-house, and if that letter is not returned through the post-office undelivered; and that service shall be deemed to be made at the time at which the registered letter would in the ordinary course be delivered.

 

(5) The provisions of this section shall extend to notices required to be served by any instrument affecting property executed or coming into operation after the commencement of this Act unless a contrary intention appears.

 

This section does not apply to notices served in proceedings in the court.

[UK26]

[update] Letter sent from my solicitor to Capquest in response to there letter sent (Post Number 45)

 

HEHE